"Cardinal Timothy Dolan has made it very clear that he doesn’t like President Obama’s contraception mandate. And apparently, he and the Catholic Church are prepared to let poor people starve to death if President Obama doesn’t give in to their demands.

In an appearance on Martin Bashir on MSNBC on Tuesday, Dolan said that the Church would abandon Jesus’ effort to help the sick and feed the poor in protest of the contraception mandate that only applies to insurance companies and not the Church itself.

'If these mandates kick in, we’re going to find ourselves faced with a terribly difficult decision as to whether or not we can continue to operate,” Dolan said. “As part of our religion — it’s part of our faith that we feed the hungry, that we educate the kids, that we take care of the sick. We’d have to give it up, because we’re unable to fit the description and the definition of a church given by — guess who — the federal government.'”

Bridget Mary's Reflection:

Cardinal Dolan, Jesus would weep at your callous threat. It appears that you are willing to abandon the central mission of compassion for the poor at the heart of the Gospel in order to get your way on the birth control mandate. Most Catholics will be appalled at this political ploy!

Ten years ago, I was a member of a support group for one of the survivors
mentioned in the 2005 Grand jury report. Our group had invited
Lynn to a meeting to explain to all of us how Nicholas Cudemo could remain a
priest when the archdiocese knew he had sexually abused a long
list of adolescent girls on a regular basis.

I decided that I would take a personal day today and see how Bill was
making out now that lawyers rather than private citizens were asking him how men
who committed horrific crimes against children could remain in ministry as
priests in good standing under his watch.

I arrived early and just spent some time looking around the courtroom.The lawyers were up front busily preparing for the day. A large group of
mostly women came into court. I heard that they were Lynn's family. There were
perhaps 10 observers and many media people. For those of you in Philadelphia, I
saw local reporters Vernon Odom, Pat Sirococi, and Terry Ruggles. I was told
that there were people from the national news and I later saw one of the women
on the CBS national news.

There was a large man sitting in front of me. When three priests walked
in and sat in front of him, he patted one of them on the back. An elderly man
asked if I were a sister. That was a first for me. I didn’t want to tell him
what I really was and upset him. ( I’m a Roman Catholic
Womanpriest.)

The trial began with a court attendant announcing, “Cease all
conversation.” A young female defense lawyer interrogated Lynn's
secretary and tried to get the court to hear how "frustrated" Lynn was with this
job of Secretary of the Clergy. That was stricken from the record. She labeled
Lynn a "workaholic" who worked at the AD office all week and then said mass and
heard confessions on the weekend. He took really good notes, she
said.

When the defense called Lynn to come to the stand, people rather gasped.
One of the reporters told me that I had picked the right day to attend. Lynn
stated his credentials; ordained in 1976, assigned to only two parishes before
he zipped right up the clerical ladder to become the Dean of Men Students at St.
Charles Seminary. in 1984, a mere eight years after ordination, well before the
age of forty. I had to chuckle about the men part. Were there any females at the
seminary except for the cleaning staff and the librarian? As dean, he arranged
activities and schedules. One must wonder if he knew anything about the seminary
swimming pool, but I'll get to that later. In 1991 he became the Vicar of
Administration, reporting to Msgr. Molloy, now deceased, and Bishop Cullen.
There he did quite a bit of paperwork, innocuous, he made it seem, as the paper
made its way past his desk, to Molloy, then Cullen and Bevilaqua. I had this
vision of never ending piles of paper making their way up and down
the stairs and into secret archives and mysterious safes which
held secrets that Lynn et al didn’t want to share.

Lynn said that the first time he was involved in an abuse case, he
traveled with Molloy to Exton, a high end suburb located a substantial distance
from the seminary. A boy made an allegation of inappropriate touch against a
priest, whose name I didn't catch. The priest made the boy undress before him.
In one case, he took the boy to the pool at the seminary, had the kid take off
his trunks and wrap a towel around himself. Then the priest pushed the kid into
the pool while holding on to the towel while the kid fell naked into the
pool.

Now, most of our suburbs in the Delaware Valley have numerous swim clubs
and most parents in these same suburbs can afford to belong. So, one wonders why
the priest took the kid all the way ( As I said, Exton is pretty far from the
seminary) to the seminary to swim. One must wonder how many other boys were
taken to swim at the seminary by priests and one wonders who was in charge of
monitoring pool use.

The Lynn became Secretary of the Clergy after Bevilaqua changed the
configuration of the office. His duties as secretary were impressive: he was a
pastor to the priests, ( I thought the bishop did that.), he assessed priestly
needs, settled living disputes, monitored admittance to the seminary, handled
the retirement of priests, and handled sex abuse cases. Having
even one of these jobs would be daunting, especially when he still exercised his
ministry on the weekends. He looked like the Pillsbury Doughboy
and sounded like Superman.

After lunch, I headed back to hear Bill Lynn raked over the
coals by the DA. “Did you,” the DA asked, “Ever hear the scripture verse about
hanging a millstone around the neck of one who harms children?” Lynn said he
did. “Did you put the needs of priests above the needs of
children?” (Get ready to run for the hills, kids) Lynn said no. “Did you ever
lie to people?” “No,” Lynn said, who hesitated and then added, maybe once to
Mark Berkowitz.

Well, Lynn told a big fat lie earlier in the day when he testified that a
pastor named Joseph Graham was part of an aftercare treatment plan for a Father
Avery, who was coming out of a nine month hospital stay. Avery was also on trial
until he pled guilty to sexual abuse right before the trial began.
According to the 2011 Grand Jury report, the pastor denied even
knowing he was on the team. Eventually, the team did meet, a year after Avery
arrived at the parish. Today, Lynn repeatedly stated that the pastor was part of
the aftercare team and was aware of everything that was going on. Someone lied
either today or last year. Isn’t it a crime to lie under
oath?

We also heard today in court that Avery was doing a good job being a
hospital chaplain via letters written by his therapist to Lynn, which made it
seem as if Lynn was right on top of things. We were also led us to believe that
a Father Kerper, an outsider from either Boston or New Hampshire, was harassing
Father Avery who was just trying to be a good priest. While we listened to
glowing reports of Avery’s progress in chaplaincy and Father’s Kerper’s taking
all the mass spots at St. Jerome Parish, the 2011 Grand Jury report stated that
Kerper complained to Lynn that Avery was ignoring parish work and making
arrangements to DJ 25 out of 31 Saturdays. Lynn knew those glowing reports the
jury heard about were untrue.

As the DA pounded Lynn with accusations that he did not protect children
from abuse, Lynn insisted that he had little to no power to do anything beyond
removing a priest who admitted to molesting children. All power
was vested in the cardinal. Lynn, a grown man of 61 said, “The
will of God works through the bishop.” (Bevilaqua) Lynn, therefore, could only
do what the bishop wanted, told, and allowed him to do. In other words, Lynn was
only following orders. He could not and would not to do otherwise, even when
innocent children were being raped and sodomized.

Lynn, his voice shaking a bit, said that he really truly believed that he
was doing his best – given the parameters of his job and his obedience to the
cardinal- to help children.

I thought about Lynn and his power and his one admitted lie. Ten years
ago, I had personally reported to Lynn that Cudemo still presided at mass at his
victim’s geographic parish in spite of Lynn’s promise to our group that this
practice would cease. Lynn’s exact words to me? “I told that pastor that I would
take away his parish if it (Cudemo’s presiding at mass) happened
again.”

Lynn let us in the support group believe that he had the power to remove
men from ministry. Was he lying to us? That would be his second lie. Was he
lying at the trial today when he said he had no power to remove men from
ministry unless they confessed when he led us believe that he could? That could
be lie #3. The 2005 Grand jury reported that the pastor Lynn allegedly
threatened with removal was never told anything about Cudemo’s problems. Was
that lie #4? Shall we go on?

How many other lies and liars and secret files are stashed away in the
archdiocesan office that thinks it does the will of God when it knowingly places
innocent children in harm’s way?

Thursday, May 24, 2012

At the end of this month, the LeadershipConference of Women Religious will meet to formulate a response to a Vatican trap whose cunning is best appreciated within the long tradition of religious authorities who craft impossible dilemmas for those they perceive as threats. Two millennia ago, the chief priests sent someone to ask Jesus, "Should we pay taxes?" If Jesus said yes, he would pit himself against Jewish resistance to Roman occupation and therefore, in Jewish eyes, against God. If he said no, the Romans could execute him for sedition. Instead, Jesus famously replied, "Render to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's."

In the 15th century, Joan of Arc's ecclesiastical inquisitors asked her, "Do you know yourself to be in God's grace?" If Joan answered yes, she would commit heresy because the Church had long taught that no one could be certain of being in God's grace; if no, they could interpret her answer as an admission of guilt. Joan looked them in the eyes and replied, "If I am not in God's grace, may God put me there; if I am, may God so keep me."

Today, the Vatican tells the women of the LCWR, "Submit to our oversight and control of your every action for the next five years." The Vatican's official "or else" clause remains unstated but clear to all involved. "Submit to our authority, or call yourselves Catholic no longer..."

Bridget Mary's Reflection

In my view, the LCWR should not submit to the power and control tactic of the bishops. The bishops do not "own" our Catholic identity. By baptism we are initiated into this faith community and noone, not even the pope, can take it away from us. The nuns are as Catholic as the pope and the bishops who seek to dominate them. I pray that Wisdom Sophia may guide the Sisters and that the people of God, the church, may continue to support these dedicated disciples of Christ so that nunjustice will be done! I am glad that we do not live in the 14th century when burning at the stake was the price one paid for following one's conscience and crossing the hierarchy. My brother, Sean, has said to me more than once, you are lucky you live in this age. If you lived in St. Joan's era, you would be a "crispy critter!" Bridget Mary Meehan, ARCWPwww.arcwp.orghttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/mary-c-johnson/vatican-lays-a-cunning-trap-for-american-nuns_b_1527369.html

By David Horsey

May 24, 2012, 5:00 a.m.

"America’s conservative Catholic bishops are so worried that some woman in
their employ will get access to birth controlthat they have filed 12 lawsuits against the
federal government. What they are failing to see is a much bigger challenge that
should have them truly worried: the independence of Catholic women.

At issue in the lawsuits is the Obama administration’s pending regulation
that would require church-run institutions, like universities and hospitals, to
provide coverage for contraceptives as part of any employee healthcare package.
The Roman Catholic Church, of course, condemns birth control and equates some
contraceptive methods with abortion. This dispute erupted in February and
spilled over into the Republican presidential primaries, onto the floor of
Congress and, notoriously, into a three day Rush Limbaughrant in which he labeled a pro-contraceptive
woman a slut.

When Republicans saw that siding with the bishops was causing them
to rapidly lose ground with female voters, they tried to change the subject. And
once the Obama administration massaged the regulation to mandate that insurers,
not employers, provide contraceptive coverage, the brouhaha seemed to die
down.

But now it's back. The insurance loophole is not big enough for the
consciences of some bishops and leaders of Catholic institutions to pass
through. Women who work for them will still be getting contraceptives as a
benefit of their employment. Conservative bishops have been very vocal in their
condemnation of the Obama administration and they are organizing a “Fortnight
for Freedom” to run from June 21 to July 4 in which they plan to highlight
threats to religious freedom -- which they consider the contraceptive mandate to
be.

Out of 195 Catholic dioceses in the U.S., though, just 13 are going to
court. In all those nonlitigating sectors of the church, there are thousands of
Catholics, including quite a few bishops, who think the lawsuits are not only
premature, but that the conservative bishops have turned this into a partisan,
anti-Obama crusade.

In California, church leaders are complaining that, before anyone rushed to
court, the dispute should have been addressed by the entireU.S. Conference of
Catholic Bishops. Reportedly, lawyers for the California bishops have sent a
letter to the national bishops’ group that calls the lawsuits “ill-advised” and
“imprudent.”

Moderate priests and bishops are refraining from participation in the
“Fortnight for Freedom” because they see it as too tainted by pro-Republican
election-year politics. While they share some of the concerns about
contraceptive coverage, they believe the issue has been hijacked by
right-wingers in the church.

So, there is revolt in the clerical ranks. And if the conservative bishops
don’t see that as a problem (and, since they have so successfully stifled
progressive Catholic voices in recent years, they may not), they should think
about all those Catholic women who are weary of old, unmarried men telling them
how to be holy. The undisputed fact that the vast majority of Catholic women use
birth control suggests that the bishops are defending a prohibition that seems
absurd to most of their parishioners."

Wednesday, May 23, 2012

"Your parents spill a few secrets as they get older.One night at dinner with my mom, I ventured that the rhythm method had
worked well for her, given that there were six years between my sister Peggy and
my brother Kevin, and six more between Kevin and me. She arched an eyebrow.
“Well, sometimes your father used something,” she said. My parents were the most devout Catholics I’ve ever known. But my dad came
from a family of 16 in County Clare in Ireland, and my mom’s mother came from a
family of 13 in County Mayo. So they balanced their faith with a dose of
practicality. After their first three kids, they sagely decided family planning was not
soul-staining. So I wasn’t surprised to see the Gallup poll Tuesday showing that
82 percent of U.S. Catholics say birth control is morally acceptable.
(Eighty-nine percent of all Americans and 90 percent of non-Catholics agreed.)
Gallup tested the morality of 18 issues, and birth control came out on top as
the most acceptable, beating divorce, which garnered 67 percent approval, and
“buying and wearing clothing made of animal fur,” which got a 60 percent
thumbs-up (more from Republicans, naturally, than Democrats)...The poll appeared on the same day as headlines about Catholic Church
leaders fighting President Obama’s attempt to get insurance coverage for
contraception for women who work or go to college at Catholic institutions. The
church insists it’s an argument about religious freedom, not birth control. But,
really, it’s about birth control, and women’s lower caste in the church. It’s
about conservative bishops targeting Democratic candidates who support
contraception and abortion rights as a matter of public policy. And it’s about a
church that is obsessed with sex in ways it shouldn’t be, and not obsessed with
sex in ways it should be.The bishops and the Vatican care passionately about putting women in
chastity belts. Yet they let unchaste priests run wild for decades, unconcerned
about the generations of children who were violated and raped and passed around
like communion wine..."

Bridget Mary's Reflection

It is shocking that the hierarchy of the Catholic Church continues to get away with such a travesty of justice the global sexual abuse cover-up and the treatment of women as second class citizens. It violates their consciences, the bishops claim to provide contraception coverage for their employees, but how about the Catholic and non-Catholic women who work for the institutional church whose freedom of conscience and reproductive health and well-being are at stake. If the Catholic Church uses tax dollars, then it should provide health care to all including contraception coverage. If the bishops were the ones bearing and raising children, you better believe contraception would be covered, and there would not be large families either! And, of course, this is a non-issue for married priests and women priests- which is exactly what the Catholic Church needs now- a dose of reality therapy. The real issue here is the bishops' political agenda and sexism! Freedom of religion applies to all , not just to the U.S. Catholic bishops. Wake-up gentlemen, it is the 21st century and women's equality is a justice issue!

Tuesday, May 22, 2012

The following is simply a 70 year
old lifetime Catholic’s opinion except for the historical information at the
end.

God has
generously given to human beings great insight into human sexuality,
specifically fertility. All God gives us
is good but could be used for bad purposes as promiscuity.

This insight is called contraception. In the Catholic Church, contraception has
become the Galileo of our time.
Catholics believe that they are the children of God, but it is time they
see themselves as adult children who have responsibilities. In this context, those married couples who
use contraception and invitro fertilization (a special gift from God to those
who cannot conceive naturally) to manage their fertility should be commended
for not accepting the condemnation of the institutional church. Could it be
that instead of being “intrinsically evil” as the institutional church claims
this is, be instead God’s sharing of wisdom to help married couples be
responsible for their children?

99% of Catholic married couples of
childbearing age use some kind of contraception to help them space their
children and determine how many they will have.
This is particularly significant for those couples who have been advised
by doctors that their genetic match will produce only severely debilitated
children or that bearing more children will cause severe physical, mental or
emotional damage to the mother.
Financial difficulties as loss of job can be another significant reason
to use contraception as this could cause extreme distress trying to provide for
the current family needs.

Therefore,
these faithful Catholic couples who have well formed consciences and are knowledgeable
about the gift from God of contraception, pray about it and make the best
decision for their families, children and their marriages. They recognize that God gave them free will
and responsibility to do the best they can given their individual
circumstances. Using currently available
means of contraception to be responsible for the family should not be
considered “intrinsically evil” as stated by law of the Catholic institutional
Church.

It is
interesting where this law began. Below
is a brief explanation of its origins.
Suffice to say, celibate males who made this law without the input of
Catholic married couples or women who have a lived experience with fertility,
should not have the right to dictate to those who live the experience.

History of Contraception and the Catholic Church

A Pontifical
Commission on birth control was set up by Pope John XXIII to get an independent
source of information to be used at Vatican II council. When Pope Paul VI
became pope, the commission became a papal secret and all of its findings were
handed over to Paul VI who could use or suppress it as his discretion. Sessions were held from 1963 to 1965. The vote of the theologians on the commission
was 15 to 4 against the claim that contraception is intrinsically
evil. The vote of the larger group was
30 to 5 against accepting that contraception is evil. After having presented 16 Bishops with their
findings, the climactic vote was 9 to 3 for changing the church’s position on
contraception. Pope Paul VI ignored all
this and wrote Humanae Vitae and
condemned contraception. Polls of Catholics registered an instant noncompliance
with the encyclical. Paraphrased from Papal
Sin by Gary Wills

Vatican II
encouraged Catholics to see the church (faithful people) as a body with a
“supernatural sense of faith.” The
Dogmatic Constitution on the Church teaches that the body of the faithful
cannot err in matters of belief. The
people of God exercise the sense of faith or sensum fidei, when they manifest a universal consent in matters of
faith and morals. If this sense of faith
as an instinctive sensitivity and discrimination is valid for reception
of doctrines and practices in to the body of the church then that same sense of
faith is also valid for nonreception.
Paraphrased from Lay Ministry by
William J Rademacher.

Could the 99% of those
who are Catholic today and refuse to accept the hierarchal stand against
contraception be validly expressing this nonreception as the sense of
the faithful?

Submitted by

Judith A Cox

Bridget Mary 's Reflection:

Thank you Judith for expressing the wisdom from people in the pews on the birth control issue. Pope Paul VI should have listened to faithful Catholic couples and the majority of the Commission before he mandated the rule against artificial birth control. It is obvious that the Spirit speaks through you and the millions of Catholics who have experienced God's generosity in human fertility! The Spirit speaks through the people of God, not just the hierarchy. It is obvious that 99% of Catholics who follow their consciences on birth control reflect the sense of the faithful, not the Pope! Come, Holy Spirit, fall afresh on our church, the people of God! Renew us and transform us as we celebrate Pentecost this Sunday!